PDA

View Full Version : So Kassandra is canon character and only novel is canon too



TheLastS0ldier
06-23-2018, 11:08 AM
Ubisoft has revealed during a Reddit AMA (via PCGamesn) that Assassin's Creed Odyssey heroine Kassandra is the game's canon character.

Assassin's Creed Odyssey's creative director Jonathan Dunmot was quizzed if there would be a 'definitive canon story,' to which he replied:

'Yes there will be a canon represented in the novel. It features Kassandra and her journey. But in the game you decide your path, there is no right or wrong way.'

So according to the lore Alexios doesn't exist and choices you've made in the game don't matter....Apparently the novel with the price of few $ is more important then 60$ (standard edition) game.

How do you feel about it?

joelsantos24
06-23-2018, 11:28 AM
One path is canonical and the other is a lie, but it still isn't wrong? Ok.

https://media.giphy.com/media/Oz0MVF2VZB1mw/giphy.gif

TheLastS0ldier
06-23-2018, 11:46 AM
Exactly! How can you say "there is no right or wrong way" and yet "Yes there will be a canon represented in the novel"? Such a double faced answer, lol.

I wouldn't be surprised if Kassandra has canon sexual identity in the novel too.

To summarize: they are just milking the franchise. What's next? The canon DLC which overwrites the canon novel story just for the price 19.99$ ?

Locopells
06-23-2018, 05:26 PM
Previously, the novels have only been cannon where they don't directly contradict the games. However, with the choice available in Odyssey, I suppose they had to make a choice.

ProdiGurl
06-23-2018, 07:26 PM
Yet these same fans played previous AC games without missions being desynched for not doing them identically to the way our Assassin actually did the mission.
Since this 'perversion' of AC thru choices keeps being brought up, I'll keep bringing up the fact that they had already been playing the memories 'wrongly' using CHOICES as to how they wanted to accomplish each mission individually.
When everyone plays a mission their own way (the way they personally preferred), they couldn't have been reliving the assassins memories.
Already corrupted. Odyssey is simply a matter of degree in choosing. If it's too far, then leave the series if it's not AC enough anymore.
AC is many different things to different fans, new and old. For me, it's about a good story, history, gorgeous environments & a different era in time..... and playing an assassin.

joshoolhorst
06-23-2018, 09:05 PM
Ubisoft has revealed during a Reddit AMA (via PCGamesn) that Assassin's Creed Odyssey heroine Kassandra is the game's canon character.

Assassin's Creed Odyssey's creative director Jonathan Dunmot was quizzed if there would be a 'definitive canon story,' to which he replied:

'Yes there will be a canon represented in the novel. It features Kassandra and her journey. But in the game you decide your path, there is no right or wrong way.'

So according to the lore Alexios doesn't exist and choices you've made in the game don't matter....Apparently the novel with the price of few $ is more important then 60$ (standard edition) game.

How do you feel about it?

I'm curious though will Layla see dialoge options on screen in Assassin's Creed Odyssey or is that just her thought progress mmh guess the later because she would have to decide what to say here through us.

joshoolhorst
06-23-2018, 09:07 PM
Exactly! How can you say "there is no right or wrong way" and yet "Yes there will be a canon represented in the novel"? Such a double faced answer, lol.

I wouldn't be surprised if Kassandra has canon sexual identity in the novel too.

To summarize: they are just milking the franchise. What's next? The canon DLC which overwrites the canon novel story just for the price 19.99$ ?

Now I'm really interested on how they do that.

RA503
06-23-2018, 11:27 PM
I'm the only one optimist ? I like non canon endings,some are best than canon ones just remember Raiden's ending on Mortal Kombat 1,also, I hope so much about some totally crazy thing like : Spoiler from Far Cry 5 : The Nuclear Ending

HDinHB
06-23-2018, 11:33 PM
For me, it's about a good story, history, gorgeous environments & a different era in time..... and playing an assassin.

Let's evaluate based on these categories:
Good story - Can't tell yet. Origins had a good story, although it was weak and rushed in the last act. Since player choices affect the story, it could be better or worse than the canon story in the book. Let's give this zero points for now.
History - Ordinarily this would be an automatic +1 for an AC game. But since player choice can affect the outcome, that means "history" can be changed, so it isn't history anymore. So that's more like -1 point. Maybe they won't screw it up as bad as they could, and maybe some history will be preserved, so I'll be generous and give zero points for now.
Gorgeous environments - this is pretty much guaranteed, so +1.
Different era in time - you are astute to separate this from history. Many people conflate the two. +1
Playing an assassin - Are we playing an assassin? I'm not getting that impression. I've read mercenary, warrior, hero, but not assassin. -1

So, being generous, 1/5. Maybe a little better if we're lucky, or worse if we're not.


I'm curious though will Layla see dialoge options on screen in Assassin's Creed Odyssey or is that just her thought progress mmh guess the later because she would have to decide what to say here through us.

That would be an interesting wrinkle though.

ProdiGurl
06-23-2018, 11:52 PM
Let's evaluate based on these categories:
Good story - Can't tell yet. Origins had a good story, although it was weak and rushed in the last act. Since player choices affect the story, it could be better or worse than the canon story in the book. Let's give this zero points for now.
History - Ordinarily this would be an automatic +1 for an AC game. But since player choice can affect the outcome, that means "history" can be changed, so it isn't history anymore. So that's more like -1 point. Maybe they won't screw it up as bad as they could, and maybe some history will be preserved, so I'll be generous and give zero points for now.
Gorgeous environments - this is pretty much guaranteed, so +1.
Different era in time - you are astute to separate this from history. Many people conflate the two. +1
Playing an assassin - Are we playing an assassin? I'm not getting that impression. I've read mercenary, warrior, hero, but not assassin. -1

So, being generous, 1/5. Maybe a little better if we're lucky, or worse if we're not. .
Well my post in context was about what makes AC, AC to me (based on all my previous gameplay). Compare it to say, Hitman series, you can see why AC is so different even if Lore/Modern Day didn't exist within it. It's all distinct to AC.

Of course we can't know what the next game will be, if I'll love it etc so I wouldn't even attempt any rating like this months before release date. As for History, alot about the game is historic/has history - and you don't know what type of history changes from our choices.
I believe it will only be in things that surround the important history - like people who may die that you know (who aren't historic figures), how battles are fought, if it makes something easier for you later... who might be with you or not, etc. Not necessarily if Xerxes is killed or not - known, set history.
But Mercenary or not, we're still assassinating & fighting like our previous Assassin characters all did.
It was just a list of what makes it AC to me.

EzioLia2390
06-24-2018, 02:31 AM
Funny how this development team keeps stressing the idea of freedom of choice for the gamers, yet as more details come out you realize there really isnt. The protagonist is a choice but if you want to follow the lore you have to play with this character. Also you can choose how you want to use the combat but you can't choose to equip a shield. Stupid excuse that you are not a Spartan you are a mercenary that is why there is no shield. 90% of the enemies, including merecenaries, you fight have shields. I was already disliking this game because of all the changes to make it look less and less like Assassins Creed. All this info makes it worse because what they are advertising this game to be about is complete B.S.

ProdiGurl
06-24-2018, 03:32 AM
>>The protagonist is a choice but if you want to follow the lore you have to play with this character. <<
How so, specifically? Is no Lore provided for Alexios in gameplay? Or are you talking about the novel about her?

>>Also you can choose how you want to use the combat but you can't choose to equip a shield. <<
. . . just like any other game that lacks a specific weapon (or anything else) that anyone may want. Providing choice doesn't mean they give every player everything they want or ask for or else they aren't providing choices. If you have an arsenal of weapons & abilities, you have alot of choices

>> All this info makes it worse because what they are advertising this game to be about is complete B.S.<<
Well . . maybe for you bcuz you're making personal demands in a different direction than they decided to take. So far none of this bothers me - I'm just hoping for some great missions, graphics, challenge, good story & other fun stuff along the way. If they provide that, it'll be another good game imo. I won't need a shield for that or Lore but I think due to the broken spear, it will have Lore included.

EzioLia2390
06-24-2018, 06:44 AM
>>The protagonist is a choice but if you want to follow the lore you have to play with this character. <<
How so, specifically? Is no Lore provided for Alexios in gameplay? Or are you talking about the novel about her?

>>Also you can choose how you want to use the combat but you can't choose to equip a shield. <<
. . . just like any other game that lacks a specific weapon (or anything else) that anyone may want. Providing choice doesn't mean they give every player everything they want or ask for or else they aren't providing choices. If you have an arsenal of weapons & abilities, you have alot of choices

>> All this info makes it worse because what they are advertising this game to be about is complete B.S.<<
Well . . maybe for you bcuz you're making personal demands in a different direction than they decided to take. So far none of this bothers me - I'm just hoping for some great missions, graphics, challenge, good story & other fun stuff along the way. If they provide that, it'll be another good game imo. I won't need a shield for that or Lore but I think due to the broken spear, it will have Lore included.

Sorry. Played every game since AC1 so I have standards on what an AC game should be, and this is clearly not AC. Yes the fact that one character is getting a novel means the other character is worthless. Should they put shields to please me and other fans? No. They should put it in because it is historically accurate and they gave an Egyptian a shield and not someone during ancient Greece when it was the norm. The rest of the game is practically copy and paste from origins that had a shield yet you think that's asking for too much? Don't talk to me about lore and then mention the spear. They literally made up the fact that it is a POE. They did that so they can slap AC on the cover and sell it to people like you who don't know what AC is. You want you're lore? How do you feel about the fact alexios and kassandra do the leap of faith because Layla learned it from Bayek. If you were a fan you would know the modern day protagonist learns from the ancestor. That is what the damn bleeding effect is. Don't know what I am talking about? Check out the recent Q&A. That was their BS excuse for it. To be perfectly honest, I used to just be a sports gamer. Then I saw the cinematic trailer for AC1 and was very interested. Played it and loved it. I am Italian and when they gave me Ezio that was the day I fell in love. The history of Italy is great but when I went to Italy as a kid and all I could see was oh thats the church ezio hung Francesco De Pazzi from. That is what it means to be a fan. I spent a decade playing these games. I want to believe in and buy this game but Ubisoft is giving us reasons not to. That is an opinion of a true fan who loves this franchise since day one.

darklion2043
06-24-2018, 08:23 AM
Sorry. Played every game since AC1 so I have standards on what an AC game should be, and this is clearly not AC. Yes the fact that one character is getting a novel means the other character is worthless. Should they put shields to please me and other fans? No. They should put it in because it is historically accurate and they gave an Egyptian a shield and not someone during ancient Greece when it was the norm. The rest of the game is practically copy and paste from origins that had a shield yet you think that's asking for too much? Don't talk to me about lore and then mention the spear. They literally made up the fact that it is a POE. They did that so they can slap AC on the cover and sell it to people like you who don't know what AC is. You want you're lore? How do you feel about the fact alexios and kassandra do the leap of faith because Layla learned it from Bayek. If you were a fan you would know the modern day protagonist learns from the ancestor. That is what the damn bleeding effect is. Don't know what I am talking about? Check out the recent Q&A. That was their BS excuse for it. To be perfectly honest, I used to just be a sports gamer. Then I saw the cinematic trailer for AC1 and was very interested. Played it and loved it. I am Italian and when they gave me Ezio that was the day I fell in love. The history of Italy is great but when I went to Italy as a kid and all I could see was oh thats the church ezio hung Francesco De Pazzi from. That is what it means to be a fan. I spent a decade playing these games. I want to believe in and buy this game but Ubisoft is giving us reasons not to. That is an opinion of a true fan who loves this franchise since day one.
I agree with you. I played AC games since 2008 too. I'll play AC Od too. And if devs ask my thoughts, this last game looks like good adventure,action and rpg game but not looks like an AC game any more.
That is my other post in this threat https://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1895021-Mentors-Guild-Community-Discussion-AC-Odyssey-First-Impressions/page2

-What are you overall first impressions of Assassin's Creed: Odyssey?

Honesty I didn't wait an AC game for this year. It looks like AC: Origins. That is true for me. Hope it is beautiful as AC: Origins and give a delicious taste like AC: Brotherhood after AC 2.
AC Games changed their shells year by year. For me last 4 games only names were AC but changed them for new fans. I saw these. For me(I played that games 2008) I never turn my back on an AC game easily. But new fans want new things. These situations aren't totally true or wrong for me. On the contrary I mostly like these new times. And probably I like AC: Odysses too.

-How do you feel about the new dialogue and splitting-narrative (choice) system?

This is my most inconvenience issue at this game. In my opinion that means changing history and also against AC story. I can't say 'That is a good progress for AC future.'

EzioLia2390
06-24-2018, 03:55 PM
I agree with you. I played AC games since 2008 too. I'll play AC Od too. And if devs ask my thoughts, this last game looks like good adventure,action and rpg game but not looks like an AC game any more.
That is my other post in this threat https://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1895021-Mentors-Guild-Community-Discussion-AC-Odyssey-First-Impressions/page2

Yea I posted in that thread to. Wasn't nearly as nice with my critiques as you though haha.

givim
06-24-2018, 05:07 PM
well it always a possibility that Kassandra is the stage name of a cross-dresser named Alexios or the other ways around making em both canon :P

joshoolhorst
06-24-2018, 07:01 PM
well it always a possibility that Kassandra is the stage name of a cross-dresser named Alexios or the other ways around making em both canon :P

''Honey I need to tell you something''

''What is it mommy:)?''

''Your dad... Your dad is your mother''

The story possibilities are endless here!

WendysBrioche
06-25-2018, 01:44 AM
I honestly think they shouldn't touch on a "canon" version of events or characters.

If they're going to offer players these choices, then let them write their own canon. Novelization is just a bad idea.

joelsantos24
06-25-2018, 10:13 AM
I honestly think they shouldn't touch on a "canon" version of events or characters.

If they're going to offer players these choices, then let them write their own canon. Novelization is just a bad idea.
But then, that wouldn't really make much sense. That would actually constitute the "finishing blow" to the canonical outline of the series, which has already been fatally wounded ever since Desmond died. Everyone plays the games differently, so if you permit the fans to write their own (canonical) story, there wouldn't be a single one but an endless multitude of those.

TheLastS0ldier
06-25-2018, 11:13 AM
But then, that wouldn't really make much sense. That would actually constitute the "finishing blow" to the canonical outline of the series, which has already been fatally wounded ever since Desmond died. Everyone plays the games differently, so if you permit the fans to write their own (canonical) story, there wouldn't be a single one but an endless multitude of those.

But why should we spend extra $$$ for canon story DLC in form of novel? Why canít they do what Mass Effect 3 did: Add three modes; Action, Role Play and Story. You wanna role play just click on role play in the beginning of the game, you care none of the dialog choices just click on story and have the traditional AC experience.

Iíve already spent 120$ on Ultymate edition and to have full story I need to get novel too....They are treating us like cache machines...

joelsantos24
06-25-2018, 11:48 AM
But why should we spend extra $$$ for canon story DLC in form of novel? Why can’t they do what Mass Effect 3 did: Add three modes; Action, Role Play and Story. You wanna role play just click on role play in the beginning of the game, you care none of the dialog choices just click on story and have the traditional AC experience.

I’ve already spent 120$ on Ultymate edition and to have full story I need to get novel too....They are treating us like cache machines...
We shouldn't have to spend extra money, considering how expensive games already are, in order to get the full canonical experience. It's that simple. The problem here, or the source of all the issues, to be more precise, is Ubisoft's business model. Their unfathomable desire to literally milk every single series they own, for all they're worth. That means spreading the series on multiple media, so that fans can feel "obligated" to cover all those, in order to get the full experience.

I've said it once already, RPG's are the ultimate form of service, and services are Ubisoft's only focus. The AC series doesn't really fit the RPG model. It never did. But they folded it into one, nonetheless. Considering what you want the most, either an open world context on which you can just explore and have fun, a good action game or the breathtaking story, you should make your choices accordingly. If you want those overwhelming stories, along with the breathtaking visuals and thrilling gameplay, then you should definitely go for games such as God of War, Horizon, The Last of Us, Tomb raider, etc. If you want simple, open world contexts to explore, then go for any of Ubisoft's series. They're all the same, really, be it AC, GR, WD, FC, etc. Just don't expect their games to represent "the whole package", because you'll get sorely disappointed.

One way or another, the fact is that pre-ordering doesn't favour the games or the gamers, it only favours the companies. I don't think we can criticise the "cash-grabbing" mentality of publishers, whilst we keep pre-ordering their games at the same time. Is it really reasonable, to blame Ubisoft for their superficial, capitalistic ideals, when you admit to have already pre-ordered a 120€ special edition of a game? The single, most effective form of protest, is with our wallets.

Swailing
06-25-2018, 12:33 PM
I don't think it's a problem if the novel has elements that are canon, necessarily. As always, the novels are only canon until a game contradicts them. So they've always offered extra lore. If there's anything really major, you're likely to hear about it online anyway.

The character choice of Legit Kassandra or Hypothetical Alexios feels pretty unwieldy right now, but I'm less concerned about the novel. The novels need a reason to exist and we didn't complain about them much before. I don't see what the point would be in a novel that *didn't* include unique canonical information. But, as Joel says, if an edition is to be called "Ultimate" then I don't see why it couldn't have included a code for the book in Kindle form, at least.

joelsantos24
06-25-2018, 04:38 PM
I don't think it's a problem if the novel has elements that are canon, necessarily. As always, the novels are only canon until a game contradicts them. So they've always offered extra lore. If there's anything really major, you're likely to hear about it online anyway.

The character choice of Legit Kassandra or Hypothetical Alexios feels pretty unwieldy right now, but I'm less concerned about the novel. The novels need a reason to exist and we didn't complain about them much before. I don't see what the point would be in a novel that *didn't* include unique canonical information. But, as Joel says, if an edition is to be called "Ultimate" then I don't see why it couldn't have included a code for the book in Kindle form, at least.
I agree.

I might be mistaken, but I don't seem to remember the books ever contradicting the games, and therefore, the mythology. Then again, I haven't read them all yet. The novels always represent a more comprehensive and thorough exposure of the (canonical) mythology. It's really a matter of context and relevance. For example, in AC1, we never get to learn why AltaÔr and Abbas can't even stand to look at each other. In the corresponding novel (The Secret Crusade), we learn why. But was that important in the scope of the game? No, obviously not. It wasn't relevant to know why they despised each other. Functionally speaking, it only mattered that they did.

I think the books should function as an extension of the canonical background of each game. Games are time-limited, naturally, so it's impossible to focus on and address every single aspect of the story that was planned for each instalment. That's the reason behind the novelisation of the stories, I believe. If there's access to the books and if there's also interest in consuming all the different media of the series, as well as in knowing everything detail about the games, then the novels represent a good complementary investment. On the other hand, the novels should never be released as an obligation to the fans.

From what I gathered, all those fans interested in the canonical perspective of Odyssey, will have to read the book, because the game might tell a very much different story. That's wrong, in my opinion. Not the fact that the novels represent a deeper and more intricate description of the canonical content of the game, mind you. But that the game may show you or make you experience the exact opposite.

cawatrooper9
06-25-2018, 04:47 PM
I might be mistaken, but I don't seem to remember the books ever contradicting the games, and therefore, the mythology. The novels always represent a more comprehensive and thorough description or exposure of the (canonical) mythology. It's really a matter of context and relevance.



Not sure about the novels. but the Les Deux Royaumes comics had some strange moments that contradicted the games.

But I'm totally with you on expanded media. It should be purely supplemental- canon enough that there's a reason that it exists, but not so deeply rooted that it feels like it should've just been part of the game itself.

joelsantos24
06-25-2018, 05:01 PM
Not sure about the novels. but the Les Deux Royaumes comics had some strange moments that contradicted the games.

But I'm totally with you on expanded media. It should be purely supplemental- canon enough that there's a reason that it exists, but not so deeply rooted that it feels like it should've just been part of the game itself.
Yes, definitely...

I think it goes without saying, that the game platform should carry the enough canonical value to legitimise the mythological progression of the story. That is to say, if you play the games, you'll learn enough about the (canonical) mythology to understand the game itself, it's context and it's place in the universe of the series, without making the fans feel obligated to buy other media, in order to fully perceive everything.

As far as the comics, I don't really know, since I never read them. I love reading ordinary novels, so I read the AC books. Not all of them just yet, but I will.

joshoolhorst
06-25-2018, 06:08 PM
Yes, definitely...

I think it goes without saying, that the game platform should carry the enough canonical value to legitimise the mythological progression of the story. That is to say, if you play the games, you'll learn enough about the (canonical) mythology to understand the game itself, it's context and it's place in the universe of the series, without making the fans feel obligated to buy other media, in order to fully perceive everything.

As far as the comics, I don't really know, since I never read them. I love reading ordinary novels, so I read the AC books. Not all of them just yet, but I will.

Believe me read the last descendant novels REALLY WORTH YOUR MONEY!

joelsantos24
06-25-2018, 06:10 PM
Believe me read the last descendant novels REALLY WORTH YOUR MONEY!
Isn't that one of the comics series?

joshoolhorst
06-25-2018, 06:15 PM
Isn't that one of the comics series?

No but there was a tie in comic that took place between the first two novels, last descendants and Tomb of Khan but you can skip the comic it doesn't really ad anything beside saying ''this artefact is a bit more interesting than I thought'' but if you wanna see the novel characters in actual form it might be worth looking it up on the internet. I was so invested in what was going The last descendants trilogy I read each novel multiple times XD and they are really short btw but definitely worth the money.

joelsantos24
06-25-2018, 06:39 PM
No but there was a tie in comic that took place between the first two novels, last descendants and Tomb of Khan but you can skip the comic it doesn't really ad anything beside saying ''this artefact is a bit more interesting than I thought'' but if you wanna see the novel characters in actual form it might be worth looking it up on the internet. I was so invested in what was going The last descendants trilogy I read each novel multiple times XD and they are really short btw but definitely worth the money.
Cool. I'm going to look into it. Thanks!

EzioLia2390
06-25-2018, 06:56 PM
Ubisoft has forgotten what the comics and novels were for. They used to be just separate stories in the same universe as the games. They gave us extra details but never made it an important piece of the story. The Daniel cross comics were the perfect example. This great story about a troubled man who also had interactions with abstergo, an animus, and the Assassins. Then when they brought him into AC3, though they handled it poorly, it was a great way to connect the different media's. Ubisoft has now gone away from separate stories in the same universe, to now huge plot points and story arcs are only being done in the comics and novels. They made us invested in Juno during the games. We wanted more. We wanted to see her get a body. We wanted to see her master plan and true intentions. Fans were teased at the idea of Desmond having a son since Brotherhood. Ubisoft then reveals him in the comics, with close to no chance of him ever appearing in the games. This is why the more AC games that come out, the less and less it looks like AC.

joshoolhorst
06-25-2018, 07:11 PM
Ubisoft has forgotten what the comics and novels were for. They used to be just separate stories in the same universe as the games. They gave us extra details but never made it an important piece of the story. The Daniel cross comics were the perfect example. This great story about a troubled man who also had interactions with abstergo, an animus, and the Assassins. Then when they brought him into AC3, though they handled it poorly, it was a great way to connect the different media's. Ubisoft has now gone away from separate stories in the same universe, to now huge plot points and story arcs are only being done in the comics and novels. They made us invested in Juno during the games. We wanted more. We wanted to see her get a body. We wanted to see her master plan and true intentions. Fans were teased at the idea of Desmond having a son since Brotherhood. Ubisoft then reveals him in the comics, with close to no chance of him ever appearing in the games. This is why the more AC games that come out, the less and less it looks like AC.

I think Assassin's Creed has the same issue the Resident Evil franchise has, first of I'm no expert on the Resident Evil franchise but I think I have seen enough of the games and fan videos on what went wrong there.
When you open your market to a much brider audience you risk to lose the reason what made the first games so great to begin with and it will slowly loser it's identity, now we have so many people working on the games with all a different vision that the identity is getting losed of the series.
.... Inbound Layla will get her own Novel/comic because they couldn't finish it in a game anymore because TO MUCH narrative.

joelsantos24
06-25-2018, 09:38 PM
Ubisoft has forgotten what the comics and novels were for. They used to be just separate stories in the same universe as the games. They gave us extra details but never made it an important piece of the story. The Daniel cross comics were the perfect example. This great story about a troubled man who also had interactions with abstergo, an animus, and the Assassins. Then when they brought him into AC3, though they handled it poorly, it was a great way to connect the different media's. Ubisoft has now gone away from separate stories in the same universe, to now huge plot points and story arcs are only being done in the comics and novels. They made us invested in Juno during the games. We wanted more. We wanted to see her get a body. We wanted to see her master plan and true intentions. Fans were teased at the idea of Desmond having a son since Brotherhood. Ubisoft then reveals him in the comics, with close to no chance of him ever appearing in the games. This is why the more AC games that come out, the less and less it looks like AC.
This image from the Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows movie, shows how the AC mythology and meta-story currently stand, that is, a complete mess.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/2a/1e/a1/2a1ea1f7e5cb6f634a2c39d30900a5b1.jpg

In summary, there are too many threads, too many connections, too many spin-offs and too many media developing the series' mythology separately. It's bound to get tangled and even tortuous.

To be honest, it may even be too gentle to say that the mythology simply got more convoluted, because in many ways, and as I said before, the series has become mythologically bankrupted. There's no end in sight, no distinct purpose or focus, or more importantly, no clear end-game. Juno was the, more than obvious, end-game in the AC meta-story, but she vanished.

karoomii
06-25-2018, 09:44 PM
This image from the Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows movie, shows how the AC mythology currently stands, that is, a complete mess.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/2a/1e/a1/2a1ea1f7e5cb6f634a2c39d30900a5b1.jpg

In summary, there are too many threads, too many connections, too many spin-offs and too many media developing the series' mythology separately. It's bound to get tangled and even tortuous.

To be honest, it may even be too gentle to say that the mythology simply got more convoluted, because in many ways, and as I said before, the series has become mythologically bankrupted. There's no end in sight, no distinct purpose of focus, or more importantly, no clear end-game. Juno was the, more than obvious, end-game in the AC meta-story, but she vanished.

Iíve been wondering for years now why Ubisoft removed Juno from the games. Has no one ever asked Ubisoft why during any interview?

rockfede5
06-25-2018, 09:46 PM
A good solution (in my opinion) that can be accepted is adding a symbol or a mark Next to the canon choices (the ones of the novel featuring kassandra).
I think that this option is the better way to avoid discussions so the people who like Lore are satisfied and the others can have a full different story.
What do you Think??let me know!!

cawatrooper9
06-25-2018, 10:02 PM
I’ve been wondering for years now why Ubisoft removed Juno from the games. Has no one ever asked Ubisoft why during any interview?

I believe Jean Guesdon touched on the subject at the Game Developers' Conference last year.

I don't know if there's a video of the Q&A session, but Rolling Stone wrote an article detailing some of it (https://www.rollingstone.com/glixel/features/ubisoft-on-the-10-year-evolution-of-assassins-creed-w518215). Just bear in mind that a lot of this is summary by Rolling Stone and not direct quotes from the event.

HDinHB
06-25-2018, 10:07 PM
This image from the Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows movie, shows how the AC mythology and meta-story currently stand, that is, a complete mess.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/2a/1e/a1/2a1ea1f7e5cb6f634a2c39d30900a5b1.jpg

In summary, there are too many threads, too many connections, too many spin-offs and too many media developing the series' mythology separately. It's bound to get tangled and even tortuous.

To be honest, it may even be too gentle to say that the mythology simply got more convoluted, because in many ways, and as I said before, the series has become mythologically bankrupted. There's no end in sight, no distinct purpose of focus, or more importantly, no clear end-game. Juno was the, more than obvious, end-game in the AC meta-story, but she vanished.

Not vanished...I think I see her there on the left, by the wig.


I’ve been wondering for years now why Ubisoft removed Juno from the games. Has no one ever asked Ubisoft why during any interview?

I think Loomer asked in one of his videos from last year. If I find it I'll post a link. I don't think it was a very satisfying answer.

Here it is, at about 48:18 https://www.gdcvault.com/play/1024890/10-Years-of-Evolution-of



A good solution (in my opinion) that can be accepted is adding a symbol or a mark Next to the canon choices (the ones of the novel featuring kassandra).
I think that this option is the better way to avoid discussions so the people who like Lore are satisfied and the others can have a full different story.
What do you Think??let me know!!

Not a bad idea, but even if they made it an option that could be turned off, I think people would be complain that it was cheating them of making their own choices. And I guess none of Alexios' choices would be marked?

joshoolhorst
06-25-2018, 10:59 PM
This image from the Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows movie, shows how the AC mythology and meta-story currently stand, that is, a complete mess.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/2a/1e/a1/2a1ea1f7e5cb6f634a2c39d30900a5b1.jpg

In summary, there are too many threads, too many connections, too many spin-offs and too many media developing the series' mythology separately. It's bound to get tangled and even tortuous.

To be honest, it may even be too gentle to say that the mythology simply got more convoluted, because in many ways, and as I said before, the series has become mythologically bankrupted. There's no end in sight, no distinct purpose of focus, or more importantly, no clear end-game. Juno was the, more than obvious, end-game in the AC meta-story, but she vanished.

I think I see her dead body there on the left to... Blown in Pieces... Maybe we see that back one day (Hope not it ended terrible it will only get worse from here out).
I think I found the side story's on the up right: Main titles and a few side games.

Can't wat for the TV show now.

AnimusLover
06-25-2018, 11:22 PM
Not vanished...I think I see her there on the left, by the wig.

I think Loomer asked in one of his videos from last year. If I find it I'll post a link. I don't think it was a very satisfying answer.

Here it is, at about 48:18 https://www.gdcvault.com/play/1024890/10-Years-of-Evolution-of

Not a bad idea, but even if they made it an option that could be turned off, I think people would be complain that it was cheating them of making their own choices. And I guess none of Alexios' choices would be marked?

Beat me to it. Telling the player what is the canon choice defeats the purpose of choice. It's the same reason many didn't like the optional objectives, the feeling that not completing a mission exactly how the ancestor did it was "wrong".

silvermercy
06-26-2018, 12:33 AM
Beat me to it. Telling the player what is the canon choice defeats the purpose of choice. It's the same reason many didn't like the optional objectives, the feeling that not completing a mission exactly how the ancestor did it was "wrong".
Indeed, it's not a choice anymore. I don't think I'll be fully immersed if I play as Alexios (even though I'll try).

joelsantos24
06-26-2018, 09:48 AM
I think Loomer asked in one of his videos from last year. If I find it I'll post a link. I don't think it was a very satisfying answer.

Here it is, at about 48:18 https://www.gdcvault.com/play/1024890/10-Years-of-Evolution-of
Indeed, the answer wasn't satisfying at all. But thank you very much for the link. ;)

So, Juno was the main antagonist of the series and then she was simply dropped, out of the sudden and just like that. Desmond was the main protagonist of the game, one way or another. He sacrificed himself for the entire planet, and while doing so, released an evil First Civilisation entity into the world. And then she just vanishes and loses protagonism? I understand Ubisoft's need to appeal to new, more casual audiences, but I have to disagree with the way it always seems to affect the games and the stories, especially in regards to those fans who've played the games and followed the series from the very beginning. I still don't understand what this developer meant, when he said that a big part of the community didn't even know Juno, so they felt it was better to let her go.

It's just kind of underwhelming, to see how fickle a company is, to the point that aspects of the games that fans enjoy and might be popular, including whole or entire storylines, may be dropped with relative ease and little explanation given. Like I said earlier, it doesn't seem to be an end-game, a clear focus point or evolution path to the meta-story.


Beat me to it. Telling the player what is the canon choice defeats the purpose of choice. It's the same reason many didn't like the optional objectives, the feeling that not completing a mission exactly how the ancestor did it was "wrong".
To be precise, it's not that knowing the canonical choice will defeat the purpose of choice, since you can still take them. The choices are still there. In essence, the root of the problem here, is that your sole interest is in the canonical content, and naturally so. Subsequently, it's the existence of choice and non-canonical content, to begin with, that defeats the entire premise of the series.